2013 Ark. App. 549
Ark. Ct. App.2013Background
- Piping Industrial Co., Inc. contracted to perform multi‑million‑dollar additions/modifications at Future Fuel Chemical Co.’s Batesville plant.
- Disputes arose during performance; Piping pulled its crew off the job after spending about $530,000 out of pocket.
- Future Fuel sued for breach of contract; Piping counterclaimed for breach, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment. The case went to a jury.
- Jury interrogatories found Piping materially breached and had not substantially performed; Future Fuel had not materially breached and had substantially performed; the jury nonetheless awarded Piping $621,699.
- Trial court entered judgment, then granted Future Fuel’s JNOV/motion to alter or amend and entered an amended judgment reducing Piping’s award to $234,961.85. Future Fuel later obtained $96,625.25 in attorney’s fees.
- Piping appealed both the JNOV/order altering the judgment and the attorney‑fee award; the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal as to the JNOV/order for lack of jurisdiction and affirmed the fee award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Piping) | Defendant's Argument (Future Fuel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred in granting JNOV/altering the judgment | JNOV was improper; jury verdict should stand | JNOV was proper and trial court may alter/amend verdict | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because appeal designated the pre‑amendment order and not the amended final judgment |
| Whether trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees under breach‑of‑contract statute | Piping contended it was the prevailing party | Future Fuel argued it prevailed and was entitled to fees under Ark. Code §16‑22‑308 | Affirmed; trial court did not abuse discretion in awarding fees to Future Fuel |
Key Cases Cited
- Dunn v. Womack, 383 S.W.3d 893 (Ark. App. 2011) (abuse‑of‑discretion review of attorney’s‑fee awards; fees allowable in contract cases when authorized by statute)